Opinion
No. C 10-03260 LB (JCS)
10-11-2011
TAIMED BIOLOGICS, INC., Plaintiff, v. NUMODA CORPORATION, Defendant. AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIM.
MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP By: Cedric C. Chao Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counter-defendant TAIMED BIOLOGICS, INC. KAUFMAN DOLOWICH VOLUCK & GONZO LLP By: Elizabeth Williams Attorneys for Defendant and Counter-claimant NUMODA CORPORATION
CEDRIC C. CHAO (CA 76045)
MIMI YANG (CA 229514)
CLAUDIA M. VETESI (CA 233485)
MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counter-defendant
TAIMED BIOLOGICS, INC.
ELIZABETH WILLIAMS (CA 92374)
PAMELA WOODSIDE (CA 226212)
KAUFMAN DOLOWICH VOLUCK & GONZO LLP
Attorneys for Defendant and Counter-claimant
NUMODA CORPORATION
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE
OF SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT AND OF FIRST AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM
Court: Hon. Laurel Beeler
WHEREAS, on June 10, 2010, TaiMed Biologics, Inc. ("TaiMed") filed a complaint against Numoda Corporation ("Numoda") in San Francisco Superior Court (Case No. CGC-10-500648) alleging breach of contract;
WHEREAS, on July 23, 2010, Numoda removed the case to this Court; WHEREAS, there is now pending before this Court an action entitled TaiMed Biologics, Inc. v. Numoda Corporation, Northern District of California, Oakland Division, No. C-10-03260 LB;
WHEREAS, on July 30, 2010, Numoda filed an Answer to TaiMed's Complaint and a Counterclaim for breach of contract, common counts, breach of implied contract, unjust enrichment, interference with contractual relations, and interference with prospective relations;
WHEREAS, on August 23, 2010, TaiMed filed an Amended Complaint for breach of contract, intentional misrepresentation, negligent misrepresentation, intentional nondisclosure, and declaratory relief;
WHEREAS, on September 9, 2010, Numoda answered TaiMed's Amended Complaint; WHEREAS, on September 16, 2010, Numoda filed a First Amended Counterclaim against TaiMed;
WHEREAS, on January 31, 2011, the parties appeared before Judge Spero for an initial settlement conference, but not did reach an agreement;
WHEREAS, on April 28, 2011, TaiMed filed a Second Amended Complaint for breach of contract claims, anticipatory breach of contract, intentional misrepresentation, negligent misrepresentation, intentional nondisclosure, attempted extortion, and declaratory relief;
WHEREAS, on May 19, 2011, Numoda filed a Motion to Dismiss and a Motion to Strike TaiMed's claim for attempted extortion;
WHEREAS, on July 7, 2011, the parties appeared before Judge Spero for a second settlement conference, and agreed in principle to resolve their dispute; and
WHEREAS, on October 11, 2011, the parties executed a Settlement Agreement and General Release.
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED that:
1. TaiMed dismisses with prejudice its Second Amended Complaint and all claims therein against Numoda.
2. Numoda dismisses with prejudice its First Amended Counterclaim and all counterclaims therein against TaiMed.
3. Each party shall bear its own costs and attorneys' fees.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
By: Cedric C. Chao
Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counter-defendant
TAIMED BIOLOGICS, INC.
KAUFMAN DOLOWICH VOLUCK & GONZO LLP
By: Elizabeth Williams
Attorneys for Defendant and Counter-claimant
NUMODA CORPORATION
[PROPOSED] ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE
For good cause shown, pursuant to Rule 41(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. TaiMed's Second Amended Complaint and all claims therein against Numoda are dismissed with prejudice.
2. Numoda's First Amended Counterclaim and all counterclaims therein against TaiMed are dismissed with prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Honorable Laurel Beeler
United States Magistrate Judge